Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest darkstar2004

Does anyone use the 135mm focal length?

Recommended Posts

Guest darkstar2004

I have always admired the 135 f/3.4 APO lens and am wondering if anyone out there uses it much. It seems like it would be a great lens to have for travel and landscape use and perhaps close-ups, all three of which which I do alot of.

 

My current M lenses are the 28/2 ASPH, 50/1.4 non-ASPH and 90/2 ASPH, which I use on my MP body (I realize that since I have the 90/2, the 135/3.4 is not a true necessity. Still...)

 

I know some will consider it a travesty that I don't have a 35mm lens of some type, but I chose the 28 because it is the widest lens that does not require an external viewfinder (which I wanted to avoid) and I thought it would be a better focal length for travel and landscape shooting - especially outdoors.. It is also just a bit wider than a 35, so to get the same perspective as a 35, I just take one step forward.

 

Please share your thoughts on the 135 - I'm very interested to hear what the group has to say about this lens.

 

Hey! This is my 100th post!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have always like the 135 focal length on the M.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have always like the 135 focal length on the M.

 

I have used the 135 Tele Elmar and the 135 3.4 on my film cameras (in Tibet, Burma) as well as on the M8. I like the Tele Elmar because I can use the head with a Visoflex IIa or III and the 3.4/135 because of its superb performance.

Teddy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest moonwrack

the 135mm focal length on the 35mm format is said to have come into use because it was the longest that Leica could effectively use with a rangefinder. this may be true but 135mm became widely available from most 35mm camera manufacturers, including SLR's.

It is a most useful lens, under-rated today but capable of excellent results in landscape photography when in expert hands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can only speak to this with a reference to my own experience which is as a motorsport journalist. I use it for panning shots of moving cars because:

A. It provides some magnification.

B. The viewfinder shows considerable area outside the 135 frame-indicator thus showing

much of what is leaving or entering the area to be photograped.

 

Yours,

R. Morrison, M4-P, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest liesevolvo

Try out with a Tele-Elmar 4/135, this lens is cheap and brilliant!!! If you don't like 135, you may sell ist with only a little loss. If you like 135, you may think about holding it or rule it in for the 3.4-APO. Probably you'll hold the TE-135..... and buy the viewfinder- magnifying lens, that is really useful for 135.

 

From Cologne/Germany,

 

Leonard Liese

 

P.S.: my other favorite lens in 135 is a 3.5/135 from Schneider/Kreuznach for screwmount with external viewfinder....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use both a Tele-Elmar 135/4 and a Jupiter-11 135/4 on a 0.85x MP with a 1.25x magnifier. The TE is a wonderful lens and I have no intentions of getting the 135/3.4 APO. The Russian J-11 is an excellent lens and absolutely brilliant for travel because it is so small and light. IMO the 135mm is a most unappreciated focal length in the M system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've used the 135 for almost 40 years, off and on. A great lens for "stepping into a crowd" and isolating your subject. I tired of using it about 15 years ago, but three years without it was too much and I had to buy a replacement. Not my most used lens, but almost always in the bag just in case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 135 has not been popular with M users, but I use it more than a 90. Most of my work is landscape and the 135 comes in handy to pick out a detail. Anything closer up, I use reflex gear with 200+ focal length lenses. The 135/4 is particularly compact. I first purchased a 135/2.8 (with the optical viewing unit) but quickly traded it in; it was much too bulky and heavy.

 

You can use a 135 successfully on a Leica CL or Minolta CLE as long as you keep the aperture small or shoot at infinity when wide open.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a shot from my 135/4 TE that isn't a great picture or anything, but it illustrates how the lens renders. This was taken indoors, handheld, at a 1/2 stop over wide open or at f5.6, I forget. One of the nice things about this lens is that it shares a lenshood with the "thin" 90/2.8 Tele-Elmarit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Please share your thoughts on the 135 - I'm very interested to hear what the group has to say about this lens.

 

Hey! This is my 100th post!!

 

I have three 135's but since I got my M8 I find I don't use them much at all. The focus of the APO 135/3.4 is off on my M8 but fine on my film bodies. I have the T-E 135 which I like the best. It's fine on my M8 and I use the head frequently on a bellows. I also have a LTM 135 Hektor which I also like a lot, I find it's an extremely good lens whether on a bellows, an M8, M7 or IIIf. My preferred body for 135 use is a MP.85.

 

Len

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

135 has apparently lost some appeal to Leica users nowadays, but is one of the most successful focals in Leitz history... the production figures of the various 135 are impressive. I think there has been a moment from which many people have entered the mood "tele = zoom = (D)SLR"... and this can be understood well... I think that for some sport/action photo, zooming and AF is another world...

But I continue to use it, even on M8, and, as other have said, the TE135 can be found rather cheap and is a superb lens: I suspect (never used it) that the APO isn't worth the price difference.... and the removable head of the TE is a very useful feature for macro with Visoflex (and tripod mandatory...).

 

At the end, the OOF of 135 is unpaired...

 

(M8, TE 135 at 5,6)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest darkstar2004
the 135mm focal length on the 35mm format is said to have come into use because it was the longest that Leica could effectively use with a rangefinder. this may be true but 135mm became widely available from most 35mm camera manufacturers, including SLR's.

It is a most useful lens, under-rated today but capable of excellent results in landscape photography when in expert hands.

 

Well, that leaves me out!

 

LOL!!

 

The current price of $2995 American (B&H) leaves me out, too.

 

I'm glad I got my Leica gear when I was able to - I sure as heck couldn't afford it now (B&H lists the MP 0.72 body at $3995 American - HOLY SHIT!!!!!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I used a 135 tele-elmar on an M6TTL .085 w/1.25 magnifier for awhile. Even with those assists, I still had a difficult time envisioning what was going to be produced. I did get some "keeper" images, but eventually gave it up and sold it because I just didn't use it much. I suppose the real reason is that 135 is a weird focal length. It's not short enough for some things and really not long enough to "get out there". I found myself bagging it and going for the SLR.

 

Just so you know, however, I wish I still had it to try on my M8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had a 135 f/4 Elmar for many years and it sees occasional use, for wildlife etc. Its best on the M3, with its 0.92 finder, gives quick focussing and a decent size frame. I don't find it much use on the M6ttl with 0.72 finder, the frame is really too small and the focussing seems too vague for anything moving!

 

I was tempted by the Elmarit f/2.8 recently, with the specs, but the thought of hauling all that extra bulk around for the odd shot was a bit daunting.

 

Gerry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, that leaves me out!

 

LOL!!

 

The current price of $2995 American (B&H) leaves me out, too.

 

 

... Confirm my idea about the Tele-Elmar : a top european retailer (leicashop) has at the moment five of them ranging 290 to 480 Euros...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Try out with a Tele-Elmar 4/135, this lens is cheap and brilliant!!! If you don't like 135, you may sell ist with only a little loss. If you like 135, you may think about holding it or rule it in for the 3.4-APO. Probably you'll hold the TE-135..... and buy the viewfinder- magnifying lens, that is really useful for 135.

 

From Cologne/Germany,

 

Leonard Liese

 

P.S.: my other favorite lens in 135 is a 3.5/135 from Schneider/Kreuznach for screwmount with external viewfinder....

 

I absolutly agree with Leonard (although his advice comes from cologne

). I bought a Tele-Elmar 135/4 from 1966 on Ebay for around 265 Euros some years ago. According to Puts the interior lens design was used by Leica up to 1992.

 

I don´t use it too often but some of what I consider my best shouts are done with it:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny you should ask. I just received a 1960's 4/135 from Tony Rose. I wanted to try the

135 to compliment my 2/35 ASPH & 4/90 macro kit. I've shot a roll of 100 Velvia & need to get it processed. This is my first used lens. The glass looks as clean as my new lenses &

the operation is smooth. It cost me $149 with the plastic case & lens cap. How could I go wrong? There are times when I want to get closer to the subject, but can't physically, so that extra focal length was appealing. I shot many rolls of Velvia on a trip to Ireland, with the 4/90 macro & really liked the "compression" of the landscape shots. That was a revelation

to me. Also interior portrait shots with available light using the 4/90 were surprises. I love

that 4/90 macro. The 4/135 seems to be a natural extension to that kind of long focal length imagery. It really sticks out from the M7, but is easy to handle while focusing & changing the aperture. It has a mount for a tripod underneath the barrel of the lens. It doesn't weigh

any more than the 2/35, maybe less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest bwcolor

What viewfinder could be used, or adapted for use, with a 135mm lens on an M8?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×